He can’t do much worse can he? Perhaps an opportunity to be an elected representative will give him the platform to further the goals Hindraf was founded upon. Or, it can be the beginning of the end for him. Either way, I think he’d bring more color to our august house with his antics & fiery character.

And yeah, I’m curious. Why Uthaya? He has by his rhetoric positioned himself as the ultimate outsider, which may be a good thing or bad depending on your view of politics.

I read your old Mkini articles prompted by S.Thayaparan’s (Commander rtd) premise that you are perhaps the most articulate chronicler of the Indian community’s problems, so I understand that you do have informed opinions on the subject.

For me I have no doubt that he will attempt to do his best for anyone he represents regardless of ethnicity but the process of playing well with others may be something that takes him some time to discover.

(1) He did ask for the PAS ticket (c.f. Dr Jeya on PKR ticket in 2008)

Realistically I do not think that the party will give it to him and I wouldn’t blame them should they refuse. (c.f. Jelapang should be given to PSM but there are no signs that Pakatan will)

(2) In the event, he would in all probability be contesting as an independent and the sole Hindraf flagbearer.

Uthaya’s rhetoric that has positioned him as the ultimate outsider is unfortunate. But the Hindraf constituency ARE outsiders and excluded from the binary of Malay-Chinese political contestation as well as the ideological battle being played out now.

There was one period when Haris was trying to launch his Third Force and soliciting names for consideration as their MP candidates. Uthaya’s was the first name I suggested to Sharifuddin (currently the MCLM prez after the Haris-RPK fallout).

However I didn’t think even then that Haris and his Anak Bangsar would have given Uthaya the time of day. The rejection further underscores Hindraf’s outsider status. Furthermore ABU not too long ago broke with Hindraf.

(4) re: “a good thing or bad depending on your view of politics”

Uthaya does not not possess the forked and honeyed tongue of the evangelista pollie to win the votes of the legions of twits. In my personal view of politics, this is good.

(I’d also like to put on record my view that CSL too is among those pollies who do not speak with the forked and honeyed tongue.

I’m not sure whether there was anytime in M’sian political history that we’ve been plagued with double-headed chameleon pollies speaking with forked and honeyed tongues like what we’re seeing post-2008.

A lot of carpetbaggers are opportunistically jumping on the bandwagon chugging to Putrajaya. (Sigh, if only we had a Datuk Onn today.)

The lack of a forked and honeyed tongue will not make Uthaya a successful pollie in the digital age of soundbites and telegenic newsflashes.

(3) re: “no doubt that he will attempt to do his best for anyone he represents regardless of ethnicity but the process of playing well with others may be something that takes him some time to discover.”

(a) “he will attempt to do his best for anyone he represents regardless of ethnicity” — absolutely.

He will. It’s the pollies having verbal diarrhoea on “beyond race” who won’t.

I wish more members of the public could be discerning enough to distinguish between the sweet talkers and the real doers.

(b) “the process of playing well with others”

True, he needs to be more of a team player.

He’s got the character of someone who’s landed himself in ISA and come out intact hence more of a maverick personality; somehow I find it difficult to see a corporate figure-type personality type landing in ISA.

I have more views, most certainly, but the above are framed in reply to your questions. If other questions are posed, then I shall share my expanded views ,)

The Chinese today in Malaysia are so Anglophile that they don’t even recognize their own origin. We don’t need a western imbibed Anglophile agenda in Malaysia as we Malaysians can deal with the original Chinese like how we do it with the Malays & Indians. Malaysia is a unique country so let’s not spoil it if our own community are not ready to deal with the predicaments of our fellow Malaysians for their predicament. We Malaysians need to make the decision but anyone else based on our own conviction.

I’d grudgingly accept it if, in the unlikely eventuality, the Chinese DAP took over Putrajaya come this GE13. But I’d certainly spit on CSL’s face if MCA went back on its words not to accept any govt position in the event that no MCA candidate was returned in a BN govt.

MCA, I forecast, will lose all of its remaining mixed seats with a Chinese majority. Even in the MCA seats with a big Malay majority I believe that the party will lose a substantial number of Malay votes.

These results will underscore that MCA no longer has any mandate, not even from the pro-Umno Malays.

Isn’t Gerakan contest in Gerik? Tan Lian Hoe? She will never lose in that kind of area. Kubu of all kubu. If Gerik lost meant BN total wipe out, which make no difference then. Gerakan also has one more seat in Johor. Simpang Renggam? That’s a bit shaky but still defendable. So yea, Chinaman still have 2. SUPP highly lost all their Chinese candidate, the only seat win will be the Iban seat.

BTW, Uthaya, you are fighting for a noble cost. But make no difference if you make it to parliament. One seat, what can you do? Now people mocking you and make comparison with Wong Tack. (Poor Wong Tack, even pro PR people mock you, well, how should I say, padan muka Raja Belit Baru.)

If he really want to fight by enroute to parliament under the flag of political party, MIC of course will never agree while for PR, Kota Raja will not be possible, PAS won the seat 17000 votes last term, and their arrogance has grown 10 folds since 2008. Choose a seat that PR lost last term like Tapah, Tjg Malim, may be that will work out.

So difficult for Uthaya to get any of the Pakatan parties to give him a seat to contest.

If the Chinese-majority satellite parties like MCA and Gerakan can only scrape through in the Malay-majority seats, then it means they do not have the Chinese community’s mandate which is handed to DAP.

DAP’s Christian evangelism must not be allowed to define the Chinese in Malaysia.

You forgot Wong Tack all these while was DAP member? He fit in EXTREMELY well. Now even the most loyal fans of PR slate him for no end, after his flip flop on Lynas and he refuse to resign from himpunan hijau.

DAP’s Christian evangelism must not be allowed to define the Chinese in Malaysia. 100% agree.

If you tell this to Chinaman on the street, they will told you, we just don’t want Barang Naik to take power. Case closed. Whether a pig or dog enter the parliament, not really care. They even put X on bulan these days. Willing to risk Hudud, Syariah etc.

As if Anwar can promise Barang Turun. As far as I am concerned, his ‘barang’ already turun (and bengkok), which is evidently shown in recent videos which he so vehemently denied.

Most people can’t think beyond promises made to them by politicians. If BN so desperately wants the people’s vote, why don’t they match or better whatever the Anwar’s circus troops promises to the people, like cheap cars, nullify PTPTN loan, oil royalti and stuffs?

The fact for that matter is that, BN look into the accounts first before they open their mouth.

So, ok, change the government, what next? Will it be many more times better?

Just look at what happened to Selangor. They promised so many things to the people, and of late, they’re getting a lot of legal suit from the people. The best the Mentri Besar can say is that manifesto is not a promise. What are you going to do about it? Cry your lungs out?

I still haven’t got my RM20 a month for my water bill rebate. My family back in Penang are still wondering why is it the toll in Sungai Nyior is not abolished yet after already 5 years, and now the state government wants to build new tolled-roads?

They ran down the previous state administrations for being down right corrupted. But did they change or reshuffle the civil servants or change the system for the better? NO! They still utilize the old system, and they appoint their own circle of party members and supporters to hold key government posts and council members.

Where are the voices of Penang NGOs seeking transparency from the state government? They have all become very quiet.

Promise is easy if you don’t expect to deliver. I hope my fellow Chinese will come to their senses when the time comes.

I have refrained from commenting on Hindraf and Uthaya because I do not, on principle, support wild and distorted allegations of ethnic deprivation or ethnic cleansing. This is not to say that the cause for Malaysian Indians is not worth fighting – it is. Official statistics have described a very disadvantaged group, especially for our Indian bretherns (Indian males).

Of course, we have communities faring equally or much worse – the orang asli and Borneo natives, but they get it across differently. The Indians in Malaysia is stuck in a rut. They do not need Hindraf, they need a post-independence super-Gandhi (managing emancipation), and we all know how even the Mahatma struggled (assasinated not even a year after India’s partition and independence). The struggle of the Malaysian Indians is not with Uthaya alone, and even if he is made the chief of BN or PR, he cannot correct the problem by diverting all favouritism, patronage or preferential treatment to the Indians (ask Obama). Even if he run and wins his Parliamentarian seat, he is at best another Wee CK.

What we need is not Uthaya, but for Hindraf to realize that they have a genuine cause. What they need is a genuine solution, not an exclusive one. Malays, Chinese or Indians need to stop idolating their ethnic champions, they need community leaders who can get the ground to mobilize. It is good they got the crowd to the streets, but this is meaningless unless they can engage stakeholders to help improve themselves and the fortune of their lot, i.e. piloting group assistance or social entreprise programs, circumventing the mandors and chettiahs and getting the community on their own feet.

The success of the Brotherhood of Islam and Hamas is not their military arm, but their social work group. The political route gives a group their voice, but as we have seen with the UMNO or MCA or PKR or DAP voices, it rings hollow without real changes or concrete achievements.

I hope voters in Kota Raja or Sri Andalas will give him their votes, I sincerely do.

re: “… we have communities faring equally or much worse – the orang asli and Borneo natives, but they get it across differently. The Indians in Malaysia is stuck in a rut.”

The differences are:

(1) While how much state support they really receive quota-wise is disputable, nonetheless the natives of Sabah & S’wak are covered by the Special Position accorded by Article 153. They have protected status in law. (We see success stories like Idris Jala for which we cannot draw any parallel with an Indian.)

(2) The Orang Asli may be neglected and not getting the best deal but nobody disputes that they’re indigenous and the original inhabitants of the land. Some – unverifiable number – of the Indians are stateless and all the problems ensuing from being in limbo.

(3) Orang Asli have native reserved land albeit they’re being cheated of the acres that are rightfully their traditional hunting grounds. The Indians have been turned out of their plantation quarters and into the urban slums. They have no land titles and no ‘kampung’ to return to b’cos the estates have been fragmented/ dismantled.

(4) The Firsters don’t dare to mess with the Bidayuh or Kadazan or Iban etc identity. The Sarawakians are as parochial as the Kelantanese. When the Sarawakian puts his state identity at the forefront, he’s not browbeaten by the Bangsar Malaysians who bulldoze everybody into their warped patriotic Malaysian Firstness. The Sarawakians would give the Firsters the middle finger – I hope more do! However among the Indians, it’s a different and sad story.

(5) Hindraf, Uthaya et al have been demonized. Granted Umno has done its share of this using state power forcefully but as Waytha himself has admitted in his article today, this policy has been rolled back since Najib became PM and yesterday there was that meeting in Putrajaya.

The Pakatan are still being jerks where the Indian problem is concerned. And they are long-term, psychologically destructive with the accusations that Hindraf is racist.

I’ll give a personal example:

I was detained by the police for half a day during the Perak assembly fall and also on another occasion questioned at the station following the Perkasa police report against me.

Added together, a few hours of my time and really, no harassment. It wasn’t a traumatic experience. That was for being involved in activities that did not put me in the BN’s (read: Umno) good books.

But with the DAP set (since I don’t blog about PKR and rarely about PAS), the smear campaign has been something terrible. Some of the regular readers of this blog like Servant of God and Puak Pakatan Pembohong would have come across the unimaginably vicious lies that the cybertroopers have been spreading about me in other blogs.

If you asked SM Mohd Idris or next (the Penang Club chairman), they can tell you which regime is worse.

How this relates to Hindraf is that the BN authorities sprayed teargas and water cannons at them (I can speak from experience having encountered both the teargas and the water cannon trucks). The effects last max a few hours.

The damage (reputation-wise) – now with all the insults, fitnah, demonizing that Pakatan is doing to Hindraf – is truly SICK! There is no other word to describe them. Some of these Pakatan people are criminally sick.

If you look at LGE’s beahviour vis-a-vis Penang Club (and his understudy — the Mama), you wouldn’t be surprised one bit that their followers are behaving the way they do.

Helen’s response is as usual insightful but I would just like to add re: genuine solution vs exclusive one.

This is a good summation of the issue but I would argue that the exclusive one is the genuine one considering the current political set up.

However, there are many points in Hindraf’s Blueprint and indeed in the original 18 point demands that affect all communities in Malaysia but which is (unfortunately) mired in communal preoccupations.

You should check it out for yourself and you will discover as much.

I mean I have issues with how the Blueprint sets up the Minority Affairs Ministry debate. I think it was Hindraf’s Ganesan who said that Hindraf should lead the Ministry with Orang Asli issues included in the portfolio. What utter BS.

An Orang Asli should lead the Ministry and the first thing that should be done is to repeal or rethink the Orang Asli Act of 54’

I think we are all in agreement that the Malaysian Indians need help. Broadly speaking, I don’t think anyone in their right mind would argue against helping the poor and the destitute, or the disenfranchised or marginalised.

Our points of departure rest in the proposed solutions. Helen contrasted the BN and PR differences in handling the matter while Conrad deems the political path as the situational solution. I winced when I read about Indian quotas for civil service, and I would wince if they created a quota for the Chinese or Dayak or Iban or Kadazan. There is nothing against Uthaya as a candidate for an Indian-majority area. There should be also nothing against Uthaya as a candidate in a non-Indian-majority area! Of course, political reality suggests that the Hindraf champion would find greater resonance among his power base. DAP is doing it, and so do PAS and PBB.

We are not in a contest to show whether the orang asli or Borneo natives are poorer off than the Malaysian Indians. For every Idris Jala we can answer with Anandas and Tonies, dare we even add Paaris.

To put the fate of the Indian community, or any community for that matter, on our self-serving elites and politicians is sheer folly. MIC offers the best lessons, as a breathing and living Samy Vellu is the reminder.

Malays, Chinese or Indians must develop some healthy skepticism and cynicism towards our politicians. You said Uthaya is not a politician, and you know what people say, your freedom fighter is my terrorist (see Sulus). Even a freedom fighter is not necessarily a good politician, just look at the Mahatma, Mandela or even Onn Jaafar. When you have people like Wong Tack, you think, hey Uthaya will make a better candidate. Well, I am with Anas Zubedy on voting for the candidate and not the party, but that isn’t what a majority of the voters think. The bulk of our voters go into the voting booth with the party line in mind, and some don’t even know who the DUN or Parliament candidates are.

I have read Hindraf’s petition and blueprint, and even followed some of the more insane drivel on their website. I note their position on Interlok, I also read the offered “justifications” for the constitutional amendment. let me just put it this way, even in PR’s manifesto there are some gems. Maybe I am not the Jauhari that Manikam wants me to be, but Hindraf is taking the Malaysian Indians down a route of victimhood, so drunk in the badge of poverty and suffering that they try to out-prosecute the Jews, and out-destitute the Congolese.

I repeat what Farish noted here:

“If Hindraf is to be accused of communitarianism and exclusivism in its politics, then we need only to look at the mould from which it emerged: a cauldron of racialised, divisive and exclusive politics that clearly bears the made-in-Malaysia stamp, a symptom of the ills of our times and the failure of the state.”

That sums up my sentiments on the matter. Hindraf IS a product of our communal politics. It represents the same communal thinking, rationale and raison d’tre. It exhibits the same flawed, incoherent and disjointed ideas.

Are we obligated to support Hindraf? I don’t think so. We support well crafted arguments and positions based on facts. If facts are not to be had, logic and persuasion work well too. A simple example is CAP’s answer to LGE. Except for a few weak suggestions, the reply by CAP is almost flawless.

Am not sure that a non-bumi will be appointed to head any GLC. Ananda’s and Tony’s cronyism is a different league

By success story, I don’t mean the billions that Ananda (your example) has amassed which is standalone and incomparable. Vel Paari is the son of a (former) senior minister — different.

What I meant by success story is an ordinary kampung boy rising to prominence because of the state set-up via the NEP — the whole works like MCKK or matriculation college, scholarship to pursue degree or post-grad etc (the criteria of my argument being the preferential treatment given to Bumi.

GLCs count as part of the govt infrastructure. Maxis/Astro and AirAsia don’t.

You mean to say that if a Chinese was appointed to head GLCs, it would be better? How would having non-Malay or non-Bumiputera helming GLCs make a difference? Cronyism? Nepotism?

You are asking for preferential treatment for Indians? Why not preferential treatment for Chinese too? Where will this path of seeking exclusive treatment end? When everyone is special, nobody is. Is that that what you are driving at?

Btw I consider Vell Paari as the best example of BN’s brand of NEP. The princeling of BN warlords is proof of the excesses during Mahathir’s time, but it is also the evidence of how NEP has been hijacked to profit the elites in a patronage system.

I do not say that having a Chinese (or Indian) helm a GLC would make its performance any better or any worse.

The salient point is at the moment a Chinese will not be appointed to head a GLC (it’s not happened before as far as I’m aware). Which indicates that at the operational level, there is a block on the basis of race.

Idris Jala by virtue of being a bumiputera although not Malay is nonetheless still deemed acceptable to head MAS. There is the two-tier citizenship ‘privileges’ evident in this display of favouritism.

In the late 70s and early 80s, there were non-Bumis who entered Sekolah Menengah Sains (SMS) schools for their secondary education – most of them did continue to Universities but, due to the mid-80s Economic Crises they joined the private sectors instead thus we are deprived of seeing this group of non-Bumi xSMS products in high Governmental positions.

Since then, not only non-Bumis but also certain groups of Bumis have become reluctant to send their children to Sekolah Berasrama Penuh (SBPs) for a myriad of reasons which resulted in the situation of SBPs populated exclusively by Bumi students – with the exception of the Royal Military College (RMC) which is not a normal SBP in the first place.

This hesitation by non-Bumis to send their children to boarding schools also apply to high end ones – Kolej Yayasan Saad has a quota for non-Bumi students which year after year they have not been able to fill up …

Another point of interest is the “survival” rate of students in SBPs – where previously homesickness is due to merely missing the parents, nowadays it also include missing the hand phones, iPads, Computers, Video Games and most importantly, the air-conditioning unit. Coupled with the phenomenon of parents “missing” their children, the obsession of getting as many As as possile and the “relatively” poor living and studying conditions at some SBPs, a slightest hiccup encountered by the child will result in the child being transfered back to the day school of choice …

re: “Another point of interest is the “survival” rate of students in SBPs – where previously homesickness is due to merely missing the parents, nowadays it also include missing the hand phones, iPads, Computers, Video Games and most importantly, the air-conditioning unit.”

Point of most high interest indeed. Never crossed my mind but ha-ha-ha.

I hate n’sync, thanks for the considered response. I really appreciate comments like yours and indeed any who take the time to write in a lucid and engaging manner. If there is a reason why I only comment on this blog, threads like these is the answer.

Ok, here we go.

Re: “I don’t think anyone in their right mind would argue against helping the poor and the destitute, or the disenfranchised or marginalized”

The problem with this is who defines the poor and the destitute? The discourse either the Bangsa Malaysian or 1Malaysia kinds are dominated by platitudes about inclusiveness but the reality is, that for whatever reason, there is a racial component on who gets helped and why.

And the reality is that disenfranchised Indians are always left out of the dynamic. And the Orang Asal gets it worse.

Re: Quotas

The BN power sharing formula is predicated on racialist policies with quotas as a major component. This was further complicated by the Malay Nationalistic polices of a certain PM who decimated non Malay participation in the civil service with a variety of programs meant to homogenize the service and establish a voting bloc.

The unintended (?) consequence of this was a system of patronage and corruption that further eroded the legitimacy of these various branches of governments.

However, no political alliance has offered an alternative to this. Why is that? But why stop here. Affirmative action programs either class based or raced based are discussed but nobody wants to admit to the sub rosa agendas of addressing race-based preoccupations.

Re: “Of course, political reality suggests that the Hindraf champion would find greater resonance among his power base. DAP is doing it, and so do PAS and PBB”

Everyone is doing it including BN but the problem is, that only when it comes to Hindraf, people suddenly seem to wake up and discover race as a primary factor in the political system here in Malaysia. Why is that?

As I argued before, it is because Hindraf pisses in the Pakatan Rakyat Kool Aid and is an indictment against the MIC, which is in turn an indictment against the power sharing formula of BN.

Re: “We are not in a contest to show whether the orang asli or Borneo natives are poorer off than the Malaysian Indians”

Maybe we should be. Actually we already are. The discourse is dominated by the Malays who say that the Chinese want too much while they (the Malays) have so little compared to the Chinese. The Chinese on the other say the Malays control everything and keep living off the hard work of the Chinese.

The disenfranchised be it the Orang Asal – who although some would say they have Constitutional protection, is in fact straightjackets. Seriously read the Orang Asli Act and its amendments and you will discover how truly fucked they are. Were you aware that it is the Jabatan Orang Asli that defines who an Orang Asli is ?…..but I digress. –or Indians are left out of the discourse.

The problem with the progressive discourse it that it seeks to dismiss, the collective problems of individual communities in an effort to appear holistic.

The shorthand for this is “class based” approach which is fair enough but the drawback of this, it that individual communities cannot voice the concerns of their communities without being labeled as “racists”.

In Malaysia it is a double whammy because all political parties practice race based politics but the Opposition which is supposed to be above such “low class” practices has defined the discourse in such a way as to demonize minority communities that unmask its multiracial façade as nothing more than lip service.

Re: To put the fate of the Indian community, or any community for that matter, on our self-serving elites and politicians is sheer folly

I agree with this. But to dismiss Hindraf and people like Uthaykumar is missing the point. Hindraf and Uthayakumar do not represent people like me or you. Whom they represent is a certain segment of the Indian community who are disenfranchised.

What they could be, are political agitators who may eventually represent all disenfranchised people if they remain true to their agendas. It is our role to see that they do.

The question is will people and organizations like these be allowed the chance to participate and will we be allowed to hold them to their words and goals?

This is the main reason why I am here. This and the fact that I get to troll the DAP apparatchiks and kool aid drinkers with impunity.

Re: “Well, I am with Anas Zubedy on voting for the candidate and not the party,…..”

OK, I am not a fan of AZ but since this is a reasoned response…., The vote for the candidate and not the party is a fallacy in politics. A candidate has to answer to his party. Even mavericks conform or find themselves out in the cold. You cannot separate the candidate from the political party.

Granted there are candidates who have good grassroots level support but this merely gives them immunity for people censure but not party politics. If they want to get anywhere in their party and influence policy they have to play well with others. Playing well with others means compromising. Compromising does not affect politicians but affects the average voter.

I do not need to tell you the complications that arise in political alliances based on diverse interest….

The reality of this is borne out in a political party like PSM. Principled, unyielding and look at the role they play on the national level. Even in their own alliance, they are being victimized.

Re: “I have read Hindraf’s petition and blueprint, and even followed some of the more insane drivel on their website.”

This is the kind of straw men I have been talking about. I am sure I could pick up gems from the polemics of every political party here in Malaysia esp. BN. PSM would be the exception though.

For instance I have pointed one of my objections of the Blueprint, there are a few others but the problem here is that nobody wants to engage with Hindraf on a policy level. Hindraf has said that in their meetings with PR that the Blueprint could be refined. I am sure they said the same to BN.

Re: “but Hindraf is taking the Malaysian Indians down a route of victimhood, so drunk in the badge of poverty and suffering that they try to out-prosecute the Jews, and out-destitute the Congolese”

Why because on their websites they list in detail (esp. HRP) the situation the disenfranchised Indians exist in. Do you get the same kind of detail in the MSM press, the alternative media or the propaganda organs of political parties that proclaim their 1Malaysianess or their Bangsa Malaysian pedigree ?

I can honestly say I was unaware of how a good majority of my people lived. I can honestly say I had no idea how the Orang Asal lived before actually reading then visiting these communities. It is very easy to dismiss as “poverty porn” the polemics of Hindraf.

There is a consolation though. I now know that when Frank McCourt wrote this “Worse than the ordinary miserable childhood is the miserable Irish childhood, and worse yet is the miserable Irish Catholic childhood.. . . nothing can compare with the Irish version: the poverty; the shiftless loquacious alcoholic father; the pious defeated mother moaning by the fire;” he was also talking about a disenfranchised Indian childhood.

Re: “Are we obligated to support Hindraf? I don’t think so. We support well crafted arguments and positions based on facts. If facts are not to be had, logic and persuasion work well too”

Then this would mean that we abstain from voting all together. However, nobody certainly not me is arguing that Hindraf should be given a free ride. Hindraf has raised many questions in the discrepancy of treatment in PR controlled states and the BN racial formula citing verifiable sources.

They have constructed their arguments using the racial language of this country but the problem is that most people would rather hone in on the histrionics. Like I said, it is easier this way.

Re: Farish Noor and the academic perspective.

Although I agree with Farish Noor and have read all his articles and books – he is so dreamy –I could point you to 15 or maybe even 20 years work of academic papers on the plight of the disenfranchised Indians.

These papers came from intelligent honorable men and women. Some of them were not even Indians. These works were respectful, polite, and probably only read by people like me.

And nobody discussed the Indian issue like they do now because of Hindraf.

Hindraf does not “represents the same communal thinking, rationale and raison d’tre. It exhibits the same flawed, incoherent and disjointed ideas”. Hindraf is a guttural howl of anguish and awakening.

But you are right; the system created Hindraf and now does not know what to do with them. And since nobody is interested in changing the system, Hindraf cannot be held to idealistic standards of what we want the system to be.

Re: With so many claiming to speak for Hindraf and trying to ride on its coattails, the Indian question is now again distorted beyond recognition

Who are trying to ride its coattails? Hindraf supporters know who
speaks for Hindraf and whom Hindraf speaks for. Hindraf is and most probably will always be the target of a vicious propaganda campaign by the Opposition. The Establishment has already taken it shots.

If there is a slant in the definition of the disenfranchised or marginalised, then fix the slant, not introduce another slant. One bad quota should not be replaced with another bad quota. It only invites further trouble down the wrong when the true indicators and deciding factors are ignored.

I disagree with your narrative that attributed the decline of the civil service to race homogenization. It is the bonsification (thanks Hishamuddin Rais) of the civil servants, enslaved through a mentality of patronage (ability to serve the politicians’ agenda rather than to serve the needs of the nation) that decimated the once highly regarded civil service. To rub salt to the wound, the Chinese gave up on the civil service and now they gripe over its lack of representativeness. The weaknesses of the civil service is not because of its Malay majority, but because of the overwhelming power of the executive which eroded its integrity. The quality of the civil service suffered because better Malaysians (Malay, Chinese or Indian) have better offers and opportunities in a developing economy. The intake quota did not destroy the civil service, the unmerited advancements based on docility and compliance and connections is what killed it.

The way out for the revitalisation of the civil service is not by bringing in more Chinese or Indians. It is by starting a culture that weeds out non-performance, reward intelligence and value innovation.

PR copied the BN formula of racial politics to gain nationwide foothold, and I absolutely agree that neither party is showing a way out of communal politics. Despite whatever DAP, PKR or PAS says, none of the parties have a base in multiculturalism. DAP is rooted in a brand of socialism which straddles secularism, nationalism and capitalism. Till this day I am still amused to see how DAP is being Christianized inside out as it was once the bastion of pure secularism against Islamization. PKR is rooted in a brand of democracy rooted in liberalism and populist rights and freedom rhetorics. It has no central core to speak of, so it a diverse group that is struggling to define itself. PAS is trying to roll back its conservatism and rebrand its Islamic credentials to appeal to a broader multicultural base. BN’s power-sharing formula is a reference for the elite bargaining system, not a formula for the masses. The masses live by another BN coda of multiculturalism, of give and take for co-existence. I heard some people are now saying that we need no give and take because there is only one universal truth and standard that will take all of us to the shining city upon the hill.

The Sino-Malay discourse is dominant because like the Black and Whites in the USA, they are the dominant historical voices. In the USA, the Latinos are coming up because they are forming new demographic forces. The Indians are not out-growing the rest, and the Bumiputeras are being absorbed into the Malay sub-narrative.

It is a class struggle because racism is used to shackle the minds of the people and to appeal to their base instinct of otherness (us vs. them). The class struggle here is evident as communalism is the tool which the elites have used to keep the masses in check. The elite bargaining system is nothing but pure manipulation to invest communal leaders with an imaginary voice to barter their collective ethnic rights.

I don’t want to dismiss the rights of the Malays, Chinese or Indians or Dayaks or Christians or Bahais or whatever denominations have chosen to grab the spotlight for 15 minutes. Every Malaysian share the same rights and responsibilities. Unequal treatment, systemic or deliberate, must be addressed properly. I am not questioning Uthaya’s right to speak for the marginalised Indians, far from it. I am questioning how being the voice or conscience of the nation could do any good if he or she cannot galvanize broadbased support to his or her cause. I don’t even question Perkasa’s Ibrahim’s rights to champion Malay interests. But you must be consistent, if you accept Uthaya, you must accept the katak. You might argue that Perkasa has got no case, since the Malays are so fantastically taken care of. Official statistics again will show you the overwhelming problems faced by the Malay community, from social ills to household debts to corporate equities. So what’s left? Are you saying that the Chinese chauvinists should have no champions too?

The problem with an approach through aggrandized prosecution and victimhood renders the community into a state of self-induced paralysis. They are damned is they take advantage of the crutch and they are damned if they don’t. We are seeing it among our Malay brethern, and you are now recommending the same treatment and medication for the Indians?

Tun Razak started out as a PM trying to represent all disenfranchised Malaysians, but his short reign (and that of Tun Ismail’s) have seen successive UMNOputeras meld the narrative into a Malay supremacy plunder and ethnic bias. If Uthaya is elected, do you think he won’t be pressured to return the favours and call in the cards to fulfil at least some of the pledges? The same goes to PR and their incoherent manifesto. It reads like a kaleidoscope of contradictory images, but those who found parts they like probably didn’t realize one scenario cannot possible contain a totally opposite one.

This applies to your position on voting for the candidate, not the party. With the current system of party politics, the structure may require the candidate to be in favour of the party faithful who can advance his or her career. The truth is that in a party system, patronage from the top dogs does more wonders than grassroot support. KJ is an example. However, without mavericks, political parties will die with ossification. Vote the better candidate of the two, and political parties will have the incentive to field better candidates. The better party is the one with better people. If a candidate cannot cut its way through party politics and expect to advance by toeing the party line, we should continue to look out for the better candidate who can, even if they are across the political divide. Winning a parliamentary or state seat based on local factors (i.e. advantageous national mood or sentiment, scandal-ridden opponent, appeal to women voters or minority voters in the constituency) is no guarantee of gladiator material in a party system. First among peers require the ability to not just convince the masses, but also your damn colleagues who are out to pull you down at every chance they have got. If PSM could survive the pole position battles within PR, it means it could not wield enough popular support to make a difference on the bargaining table. As such it should remain the mosquito party that it is. The robust inter-party games (as opposed to intra-party games) in PR represents an alpha dog contest. DAP supports the weaker PKR to check PAS, but when it suits them at state level, they would support the minority PAS to check the powers of PKR. This is the same game played in BN.

Now, we should always go for the most important unit that matters in a situation. Voters have no control over party affairs where leadership positions are decided by members. However, voters can choose to pick the better candidate in a perfect world with equal information. Even in an imperfect world, the “better” candidate wins (be it through packaging or manufacturing). If the Presidents’ men lost in the general elections, he will be brought down for his mistakes. I cannot understand why people vote on the basis of political affiliation when it is evident that the association between candidate and party ideals are clearly flawed. Anyone voting Hannah Yeoh should be perplexed by its bible thumping drivel in a supposedly secular DAP. Clearly, the voters ARE voting based on the “better” candidate, whatever those measurements are.

Poverty porn is available for the Malays, Chinese, Indians and Orang Asli, if you care to make them available. I can give you all the sob stories you want. I have the same academic data that shows the disparity in SES status between the races. I have presented the similar results for public consumption. Many are aware of the plight of the Indians, the only notoriety Hindraf got was from the Queen Elizabeth stunt ito solve it. Interlok got withdrawn too, but it doesn’t mean NIAT or Hindraf was correct. MINY said that it is time to take the macro approach ala the UMNO NEP style. To NOT do so is unfair, as MINY claimed. How can it be unique when UMNO is top-bottoming the whole dame NEP for Malays all these years?

You have environmentalists, rainbow coalition supporters and abortionists as voters. They need to choose who to cast their vote for. Most will cast their lot with the man or woman who are at least not openly hostile to their beliefs and preferences. Some will overlook such affinities for the broader picture, or a silly “principle” or a confounding or overwhelming “factor”. The point is, it is even presumptous to assume Hindraf supporters will vote for Uthaya, if him standing under the banner of PAS will not work out for the ultimate aim against a candidate from the sucky MIC. It is not just the party banner here at work. I believe Uthaya should be sunk or made to swim on his own personal capacity to serve in comparison to his opponent, not his party colours. You seem to think Hindraf supporters should vote for Uthaya regardless of his party ticket and opponent, but on the basis that he champions a noble cause.

Well, many a people have championed even nobler causes or causes with equal if not greater value. It is easy to walk from Kuantan to Kuala Lumpur, it is harder to make any actual contribution to make a real difference to the lives of the people.

Fixing the slant often times means introducing a new slant. You change the discourse by introducing a new element in it. I think you are conflating quotas with performance.

Nobody certainly not me, is saying that quotas should not be subject to the strictest performance based scrutiny.

Re: Bonsification of the civil service.

Your narrative however is a sub theme of the one I put forward. There is ample evidence that the civil service was subjected to a program of homogenization. The system of patronage and subservience to political masters was a natural byproduct of this.

The Chinese and the Indians gave up on the civil service because where once they thrived opportunities become scarce when these programs of homogenization took place. I never once claimed that the weakness of the civil service was because it is dominated by a particular ethnic group. Although this is kind of rhetoric has been used against many who are critical of the civil service.

The quality of the civil service suffers not because better Malaysian have better opportunities elsewhere but because sycophancy and a culture of entitlement is rewarded and integrity only paid lip service . The intake quota did destroy the civil service in the sense that it became part of the cultural identity of a specific community and an extension of a bloated bureaucracy, that was both seen as necessary to safeguard the welfare of a majority community and as a counterbalance to the private sector that was dominated by an ethnic minority.

Re: Revitalization of the civil service.

The revitalization of the civil service begins by reaffirming its place as a service for all Malaysian and this means reintroducing a culture of diversity which would establish the principle that Malaysians regardless of race are stakeholders in these institutions and not the political elites. The process of weeding out nonperformance, rewarding intelligence and valuing innovation would then be applied to all regardless of race.

While I agree with you on this and indeed have argued much the same in other posts, where we disagree is in your next statement (which I find interesting for a variety of reasons and hope to articulate why);

Re: “BN’s power-sharing formula is a reference for the elite bargaining system, not a formula for the masses”

Actually, I would argue the opposite of this. With the rise of PR as a credible alternative to BN, I would argue that the power sharing formula has become a reality for the masses. True the (Malaysian) masses used to live by another “give and take” formula which I would argue is present in nearly every multicultural polity in the world, but what PR has managed to do extremely well is translate the nebulous “social contract” of BN into some sort of “tangible” reality where beneath the Bangsa Malaysia sham, lurks the assurances that the same old racial expectations would be satisfied albeit in a more “fairer” way. In other words, the unspoken dogma emanating from PR is that, it is not that the power sharing formula is “broken” but rather PR would apply it in a more egalitarian manner. How this is possible is beyond me but there it is.

You can witness this in the rhetoric of Pakatan partisan who are very well aware of the nature of the race game being played with the concession that although a Malay majoritarian perspective is always present, the Chinese/Indian perspective is on “equal footing”. Perhaps it is because of the years of brainwashing nobody thinks that the system needs to be changed. About the only political group who wishes to see a change in the system is PSM that is marginalized for various reasons.

Re: The Sino –Malay discourse is dominant

No arguments here. However, my point was that this Sino-Malay discourse claims to represent all ethnic groups, when the reality is that it does not. As for how powerful the community is as a voting bloc, this remains to be seen. As long as there is a split in the Malay community, as a diminishing minority, the Indian community has room to maneuver.

As for the American perspective, the Latino community has always been traditionally courted by the GOP, for various reasons. Of late, this trend has been changing. As I argued in another post it is not productive to draw from the American context. The discourse is changing because the Nonwhite demography will soon overtake the White community. It is very different here in Malaysia. The “Malay” community (however, you define it) will eventually be the only voice in the discourse.

Re: “It is a class struggle because racism is used to shackle the minds of the people”

I disagree. It is not a class struggle yet. Racism has not been used to shackle the minds of the people. People are very aware that their ethnicity determines who they are in this country. Racism is a byproduct of the power sharing formula. The elites do not have to use racism to shackle our minds because we as a people have no interest in moving beyond race. The set-up of the alternative front is evidence of this. Racial bargaining chips are used by not only the ruling elites but by the economic elites.

However, it will become a class struggle soon. We can already see this when it comes to Hindraf. Hindraf on the one hand is dealing with a race conflict with Establishment forces which includes the Opposition. One the other hand it is involved in a class struggle with the Indian community. You don’t have to look very hard to discover the narrative that the middle class Indian vote is assumed to belong to PR whereas the ungrateful working/lower class Indian vote is being put up for sale by Hindraf.

A class struggle will eventually brew within the Malay community. The reasons for this are simple. Not every Malay has a seat on the UMNO gravy train. Too many leakages in the affirmative action programs and the rent seeking culture will ensure that a certain disenfranchised section of the Malay polity will awaken to the fact that as Malays and masters of this land they have nothing really to show for it.

The dialogue is already there. I have said that what Anwar has done is seize upon the class resentments of a certain section of the Malay polity. PAS is doing it too using Islam as a rallying cry.

Re: “Every Malaysian share the same rights and responsibilities. Unequal treatment, systemic or deliberate, must be addressed properly”

Agreed.

Re: “I am questioning how being the voice or conscience of the nation could do any good if he or she cannot galvanize broad based support to his or her cause.”

Well it seems to me you are doing much more than this. But to answer your question, I have no idea. But here is what I think. PR does a remarkable job of gaining broad based support for its Utopian ideas but these ideas are complete BS. So do I think that Uthaya should tone down his rhetoric ? Of course I do. But somehow I think it does a disservice to his cause if he tells people what they want to hear. To serenade people with the whole Bangsa Malaysia crap.

If the oppositional forces in this country were really the agents of change they claim to be, then someone like Uthaya would get the broad based support he needs. But I dunno’, it does seem like a losing battle.

Re: “But you must be consistent, if you accept Uthaya, you must accept the katak”

Could you tell me what Ibrahim Ali is fighting for? Could you define what “rights” the Malays are supposed to be losing? What “rights” they aspire to gain. Hell, I don’t accept what Ibrahim Ali says but unlike that douchebag, I have never argued that people should be held under the ISA (like him) who question the status quo.

Re: “since the Malays are so fantastically taken care of. Official statistics again will show you the overwhelming problems faced by the Malay community, from social ills to household debts to corporate equities”

So why doesn’t he (Ibrahim Ali) take it up with UMNO? After all, they have had stewardship of this country since independence. They claim to be champions of the Malay (sic) race and Islam. They champion the cause of Ketuanan Melayu and how affirmative action programs are part of Malay “rights”. With all this why are the Malays statically in the state they are in but more importantly why doesn’t Ibrahim Ali take up his grievance with them ? Better yet maybe he should join with Uthaya and bargain collectively with UMNO.

Re: “We are seeing it among our Malay brethern, and you are now recommending the same treatment and medication for the Indians?’

Affirmative action programs are but one aspects of the Blueprint. But I agree with you brother, I do not support affirmative action programs of any kind but unless your argument is that these programs should be discarded, I don’t think you should use it as a criticism against Uthaya and Hindraf.

Re: Tun Razak, Uthaya and politic of compromise.

If this is your argument that why should we vote for any candidate? Why is this a criticism against Uthaya personally ? If anything Uthaya is the HRP, so one does not need to do much separating. If anything, Uthaya could have drunk the kool aid and capitalized on the Hindraf goodwill instead of choosing to expose the sham which is the Bangsa Malaysia propaganda. In other words, he chose to piss in the kool aid instead of dispensing it.

Now to me, this seems like a candidate who would not compromise for the sake of political expediency. I could be wrong but I still do not get your point. Again, by your logic we should not be voting for anyone because every politician compromises.

Re: “This applies to your position on voting for the candidate, not the party.”

This is not my position it is YOUR position. All I was arguing was that you cannot separate the candidate from his/her political party, which is why YOUR stance and ANAS ZUBEDY’s is fallacious.

As for your contention that voting for the better candidate would act as an incentive for the political party to field better candidates….again the whole issue of inter party politics and warlordism comes into play.

What political parties find useful are candidates that can win. Now of course there are the partisan instincts of the population but winnable candidates are normally those who play to the lowest common denominator of the voting demographic.

I have no idea where you get the idea that “damning your colleagues” is a norm in Malaysia. I could name you many such instances but at the end of the day those who do are either left out in the cold or leave the party.

Of course, there have been many second acts in UMNO but certainly not for such altruistic reasons as speaking up for the average Joe Rakyat but more often because of inter party power plays.

PSM does not survive the inter alliance play of PR not only because it does not get popular support but also because partisan politics trumps ideology.

As I said earlier, people vote on partisan lines so the question of “better” candidate is a moot point. To be honest, I do not get what you attempting to convey here.

Re: Poverty porn available to Malays too.

Is it really available to them? I dunno’ maybe. But the point is that as far as the Malays are concerned they have a whole system of STATE sponsored affirmative action programs, social programs, religious programs, NGO programs, private sector (State influenced) and Constitutional safeguards which have been interpreted way beyond its purview which differentiates the community from the Indian experience.

As for the Chinese, the private sector is their safety net. Does this seem an unfair distinction to make? Well yes, it is but this is the reality.

Re: “How can it be unique when UMNO is top-bottoming the whole dame NEP for Malays all these years?”

I have three words for you: EVENTUAL CLASS CONFLICT

Re: “The point is, it is even presumptous to assume Hindraf supporters will vote for Uthaya, if him standing under the banner of PAS will not work out for the ultimate aim against a candidate from the sucky MIC”

Why ? PR supporters and BN supporters do the same thing. It’s not about the candidate but the party, right? But since he is going the Independent route, this is a moot point, now.

Re: “You seem to think Hindraf supporters should vote for Uthaya regardless of his party ticket and opponent, but on the basis that he champions a noble cause.”

Is there any other reason? What do you think this whole election is about ? It is about people voting for candidates because they believe their cause is noble. PR partisan would vote for anyone running on a PR ticket because they think that banishing the evil UMNO would solve their problems.

Similarly, BN partisan would vote for anyone running on a BN ticket because they believe that the cause of national unity would be best defended by BN.

The difference between these partisan and me, is that I am willing to defend my position on why I think the cause is noble, without subterfuge or double speak.

Re: “Well, many a people have championed even nobler causes or causes with equal if not greater value. It is easy to walk from Kuantan to Kuala Lumpur, it is harder to make any actual
contribution to make a real difference to the lives of the people”

I wish you knew more about Orang Asli. It is not that government isn’t doing anything for them, it is just how their lives are…

Many are nomadic, most are attached to their ancestral birthplace. Their kind are a complicated matter to handle. But one thing for sure, they are very attached to land, that is how they make a living. That is why when lands are cleared for logging and mining like in Kelantan, and the recent few years, in Kedah, they became displaced. This is what causes problem to them.

Every once in a while, a few of them decide to venture out of the norm. The government supports them. They have access to free healthcare, education, welfare support, just like the rest of us.

The problem of disenfranchised Malaysian Indians have never been in the limelight until HINDRAF arose predominantly to the urbanites to see the effect on GE12. HINDRAF may have been coarse in their initial approach as many grassroot movements are but they all tend to refine as time passes by.

It is difficult to deal with micro socio- economic issues that are plaguing this community through chains of social networks or enterprises as the outreach does not justify the gravity of the problem faced by this segment. As an example you maybe donating to a charity home, or doing social work within your circle of friends. That is good but your time is limited and the exposure for it to grow is limited.

Bearing the irreparable diminishing socio economic development of the DEW workers and its generation over the last 50 years, HINDRAF moved on a macro basis, not dealing on individual basis but to target lawmakers for the uneven policies and how it should be rectified such as restitutive solutions as seen in the HINDRAF Blueprint so that these disenfranchised people can get a fair equal playing field.This approach is unique as it is from top to bottom.

Bottomline, we all can argue, agree to disagree whether for political or non political reasons but understanding, acknowledging and the ability to act upon it is an individual prerogative in unity is something we need to ask ourselves when we see the predicament of the disenfranchised Malaysian Indians. The solution lies in each one of us when we ready to deal with the truth for another fellow Malaysian.

Putting aside my reservations on Hindraf’s combative and confrontational approach and their leadership’s personalities, I find Uthaya and Waytha’s penchant for parliamentary seat is rather puzzling and disconcerting. I don’t see how that would help the cause other than providing additional soapbox for them to conduct more press conferences.

Standing on the ticket of a political party would only compromise their principles, perhaps fatally so. The way Uthaya was demanding PAS for a seat sounded so desperate and certainly does not befit such noble cause that he’s fighting for.

It is clear by now that Waytha’s fast is going nowhere fast and that he’s no Anna Hazare. The papers that I read (Nesan and Nanban) are only giving scant coverage with the local Tamil papers being more interested in Tamil Nadu politics and the Sri Lankan issue than Waytha’s fast.

To me he has only one way to end this fast honorably and that’s by striking some deals with Najib. There is no way that Najib will allow Hindraf to contest under BN or agree to the Blueprint in full – no sane Malaysian politician will. But there are various other options available for Waytha. Perhaps a role in a new government organization to help Indians. But Waytha has to understand that his demands must take cognizance of the Malaysian context and not viewed in isolation.

I agree with you on this point, but the rest of CK is the typical personal insinuation on personalities without the addressing the issues. I

just wonder where was the Malaysian cognizance all these while over the last 56 years that we would need a HINDRAF to arise.

Why the isolation solution is pertinent because they had been isolated for the last 56 years without an enduring policies to drive them doldrums for the non cognizance by fellow Malaysians.

Let’s look at the reality and truth in the current scenario for the Malaysian Indians. Can anyone argue on these facts?

Largest number of stateless persons, highest suicide rate in the nation, lowest life expectancy rates- 67.3 years compared to national average of 71.2.

Highest school dropout rates – only 5 percent of Indians reach the tertiary level compared to the national average of 7.5 percent.

Highest incidence of drug addiction in proportion to population.

Highest number of prisoners in proportion to population and death as well.

Largest number of gangs are now Indian and that 60 percent of blue collar crimes are committed by Indians.

Second highest infant mortality rates.

Highest number of single parents in proportion to population.

All these vices were nowhere to be been seen before the displacement of estate workers who were gladly contributing to the country’s growth without any expectations besides being able to live in harmony with other Malaysians.

It is is not an idealist world, but there are painstaking issues for the Malaysian Indians that needs to be addressed if we are genuine in the approach. Talking about the past, what has been, history is not going to change their predicament, but to move forward in resolving these issues in fairness even if it is in isolation as it warrants the support of fellow Malaysians as a stakeholder of the community irrespective of the origin for the isolated bunch.

firstly just wanted to say i thoroughly enjoyed reading the comments on this thread. it is wide-ranging and mid-expanding, so much so that it drove me to leave this comment, my first EVER ! to a blog. yeah yeah yeah call me katak bawah tempurung yang tenggelam di dalam telaga :-)
‘
MalaysianinNewYork mentioned the ‘displacement of estate workers’, which reminded me of a conversation i had in the mid 90’s. i stopped by the plantation quarters to talk to a family there. at the time, the estate was bought over for re-development into a housing area complete with a mini township. i was curious what would happen to community.

the person i spoke to told me that they were to be absorbed into the caretaker staff providing continuity to their livelyhood. i wondered about the children, many of whom i was sure not only enjoyed the close-knit community protection and nurturing, but at the same time aspire to grander things much like their pals in the kampungs and the cities.

to make a long story short, i think i stumbled across an inflection point that would change the communal landscape of our country, one that many of us probably did not have the opportunity to see because it happened out there in the boonies.

for this reason, i think (and my apologies for any unintentional slight on my part) this is one example where a person from the community needs to be ‘the voice’, because unless you are the one walking in those shoes, it would be hard to express the frustration (everyone needs to vent a bit) and cry for help, not necessarily in ‘this is what you need to do for me’ fashion, but something more along the line of ‘this is the problem i need you to help me solve for my community’.

P/S – i dont have a solution, and yes, i am naive and an optimist who believe in the goodness in people

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. That is a reality check when you are ready to deal with the truth.

On my own recollection, I am a avid sport personality who had represented up to the national level in a particular team sport. But what actually fascinated me is when in primarily days, those estate kids would outrun, outplay everyone one of us in Sek Kebangsaan or one of the La Salle schools.

Then you come into secondary education, these kids are nowhere to be seen nor nurtured for the talent that they had. Imagine if these children from the estates would have been nurtured without a convoluted policies?

I know for a fact that an Indian Malaysian in the estate invented a reverse gear for a motorcycle in the 80’s, yet this is unheard of. Talent and possibilities in Malaysia is contained because we the public rather heed what is susceptible for our own convenience like how we would rather pay a bribe to the policeman for speeding, then bitch how the system is corrupted.

The solution is not whether you see it or naive about it but whether it strikes a cord in your conscious to speak out about it irrespective of the origin but as a Malaysian.

1. Everybody must have passion especially in fighting for rights.
2. Respects and Appreciates must lead all approach, communications and methods.
3. 2 – 1 = 1; these aren’t winning formula in social responsibility, it should be 2 – 1 = 3 -> every body.!
4. We must educate our self towards the rights. Not blindly
5. Rights – What the reference?
5. Choose:
5.1: Rights means limitation and freedom or
5.2: Rights means ‘Do What Ever You Like’
6. in short .. how much you understands your rights.

The question is how is he gonna win, i think a large majority of the Indian votes will go to him while the Malays votes will be split between PAS and BN. That leaves the Chinese votes. Now if DAP were to contest there instead of PAS then it’ll be dificult. (this might happen if PAS and DAP decide to swap). Assuming that the swap doesnt happen, Uthaya needs to try to tap into the Chinese votes.

I think the needs of the majority Chinese voters in Kotaraja are very different from the Indian voters.

I believe concerns over violent crime, theft is a big issue among the Chinese voters, apart from that other council level issues such as MPK services, floods, traffic are probably what concerns the Chinese.

As for the Indian voters, well you know what they’re main grouses are and these are the issues Uthaya is fighting for.

Now how does Uthaya is going to tap into that all important Chinese votes? He needs to explain to them the reason for crimes – poverty, lack of education, marginalisation etc, etc. He needs to explain to them that by attacking those issues (which are related to the Indians) the Chinese voters will also enjoy the fruits.

Some of us know that Uthaya defended non Indians (both Malays and Chinese) in death in custody cases, this information needs be supplied to the Kotaraja public (the non indians) to make them understand that he is not racist (no thanks to the character assasination by opposition cyber troopers). Even Harakah has written good things about him during the Reformasi days. All this info needs to be reproduced in the form of leaflets and distributed.

Helen, my question – are there more ways for us to engage the non-Indians (Malay and Chinese) in the Kotaraja area to sway their votes to Uthaya? Mc G

read comments from PR supporters, condemning Uthaya for his decision. Chinese readers (believed to be DAPsterslah) as usual leading the attacking fiesta. but, more Indian commenters back up Uthaya and support him.

this time around I’m more interested in independent candidates. Other than Uthaya representing Hindraf, I’m pretty excited for candidates from ISMA, ARUS BARU. sort of new breath for Malay representatives.

will we see any Chinese independent candidates who got bored with both MCA and DAP?

Back to ur question bout RK Sandhu, I found 4 facebook pages with her photo, one of it was avtually saying that she’s a male in the profile. However there’s one which might be the real one, this one actually has more photos of her. So im not very sure. Another thing, she’s been awfully queit lately though – if im not mistaken it was soon after the comment bout her here.

just my suggestion, i think there’s no hope and just waste time for you sis Helen to write anything about MCA. MCA is gone with the wind.

better concentrate on Indian issues and put up some articles for Indian community, I can help you translate into BM and we have many Indian commenters here, maybe can translate your article into Tamil and create one special blog in Tamil to explain the real issues surrounding them. Malay blogger can reblog and spread your articles around.

MalayPrincess, actually there enough articles in Tamil already by Hindraf and its many factions about the Indian issues.

The issue is not lack of articles but the fact is as far as the Indian community is concerned, Hindraf issue is no longer as emotive as it was in 2007/2008. There is still a core group of Indians dedicated to Hindraf / non-political path.

They consist of 2 groups – one the poorest Indians and on the other end educated, urban and middle class Indians. Beyond this group there is little support for Hindraf. You can see that the Tamil papers hardly print any news about Hindraf. Certainly there are far more news about Tamil Nadu CM (Jayalalitha) and the state Opposition leader (Karunanithi) than Uthaya or Wahtya. Sad but true.

In the post 2008, there are too many people have been trying to claim the Samy Vellu’s mantle as the Indian head honcho both from PR and BN. But every one of PR Indian leaders have lost their credibility while MIC ones still too new to be assertive. In this vacuum, the consensus is that for most Indians Najib is seen as the best PM ever and one they can trust. In fact even if the Indians don’t like BN or MIC, they will vote Najib.

As for Uthaya, it is hard for him to win in Kota Raja. I have friends and relatives in the area and while he might have some hardcore supporters (Klang traditionally been Hindraf’s spiritual capital), it is not sufficient for him to win.

I heard that PKR and PAS already started campaigning and been focusing on running him down more than the BN candidate.

I like India. I grew up as a boy in India. I spoke Urdu and Hindi. The people of India are friendly and hospitable. I do not see why all the Indians should not vote BN as led by the UMNO withe the 14 component parties. I say please believe in Dato Seri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak.

i put the translation here. please check & edit if necessary.
some points, i’m not sure if relevant due to Hindraf already signing MoU with BN. some points can be manipulated by opposition Malay speaking bloggers. however I leave it to you to decide. the next i’ll email to you. going back to kampung today. take care *o*

As I was reading MK today, one thing struck me in the article of the Rtd Comm. Thayaparan’s article. It seems that he and Lim Teck Ghee actually acted as go between to match make Hindraf and PR. This is an interesting insight on our so-called NGOs. This shows that despite their so-called impartially they actually work for Pakatan.

Despite my personal dislike of Waytha and Uthaya, the tone and language used by Thayarapan was shockingly vulgar and below the belt. I think Hindraf should respond him and give their side of the story.

Please also read the comments, the insult on Indians and Hindraf used to be bad but it has sunk even lower to the bottom of the sewer.

When I was a little boy in India as a refugee, I experienced the hospitality and friendliness of the Indians eg. the Hindus, the Muslims, the Parsis, the Anglo-Indians, the Catholics, the rich and the poor, etc.

This is what I call compassion which makes a country great. The BN as led by UMNO with the 14 component parties has it – COMPASSION. Not money, money, money.